The World Archaeological Congress (WAC) is surprised and disappointed that the editorsof Time allowed a story such as “Antiquities: the Hottest Investment” to be publishedwithout providing a more balanced account of the myriad consequences associated with thetrade in antiquities. Many of our members, comprised of those involved in archaeology andheritage issues in over 90 countries, read this article with utter disbelief. We call upon Timeto retract its apparent advocacy of a practice that is so clearly detrimental to ourunderstanding of our own human past and to make amends by informing its readers of thebroader implications underpinning this article.

The direct link between the global antiquities market and the irreversible destruction – as aresult of looting - of archaeological sites the world over is well documented. By blatantlyencouraging readers to acquire archaeological material as a sound investment, this articlestimulates fails to examine the nefarious consequences of collecting – artifacts ripped fromthe ground, the desecration of tombs and burials, temples and monuments alldecontextualized and devoid of information that they might provide about past societies andbeliefs of people in ancient times.

While the article begins by highlighting the sale of the Guennol Lion, a supposedly “legallyacquired” antiquity (according to the laws and ethics of 1948), it fails to discuss the harshrealities that all too often these illegally excavated materials are leaving regions (usuallyless-developed) torn by war and/or economic distress, coming into wealthy (moreeconomically developed) countries through a series of illegal maneuvers.

Your article cites two antiquities dealers, who make their living by stimulating demand forthese objects. It unashamedly promotes the valuing of these objects as investments (as wellas their value as markers of taste and wealth). Nowhere in the article is the value of thesepieces as archaeological artifacts mentioned. Unfortunately, whenever an ancient object isremoved from its context, it obliterates most of the clues that archaeologists and others canuse to interpret and understand the past.

The depiction of antiquities as legitimate objects for investment is extremely disturbing inits disregard for international law regarding cultural property. Behind every object thatsurfaces on the antiquities market is a story that more often than not is one of illegal export,questionable provenance, possible forgery, regions racked by civil unrest or economichardship, and gaping holes left in the ground or on temple walls. In truth, it is difficult todescribe or imagine the degree of destruction that takes place in order to find one smallobject worthy of the antiquities market. Global trafficking in antiquities leads to destructionof archaeological sites and loss of information about cultural heritage. The article points toa serious issue that has arisen since the invasion of Iraq- the loss of that country’s culturalproperty. The statue depicted in the piece is described as coming from a “dig nearBaghdad.” It is no part of the practice of archaeology to provide objects for economicconsumption.

In addition, objects that were originally placed with burials are frequently targeted bylooters when searching for material for sale. The practice of investment in antiquites isclearly linked to the destruction and disrespect shown for human graves. By urginginvestment in all types of objects, Time is positioning itself as an advocate for adehumanizing practice.

We would call your (and your readers’ and writer’s) attention to the Red Lists published bythe International Council of Museums as an attempt to trace some of the hordes of objectscoming out of Afghanistan, Africa, Iraq, and Latin America to satisfy the acquired tastes ofcollectors (http://icom.museum/redlist/). These lists represent only a small portion of amuch larger phenomenon that supplies the “increased interest in art and antiquities as aninvestment” that your article promotes. This amounts to the destruction andcommodification, for the sake of vanity, of someone else´s valued heritage.

The article notes that recent laws have restricted the importation of antiquities. These lawswere passed for good reason and it is irresponsible to consider only their impact on themarket and not on the cultural heritage they were designed to protect.

Tastes in collecting are shaped by dealers and by articles just such as the one you publishedon December 13. It seems unconscionable for Time to promote the collecting of antiquitiesin this manner, without addressing the broader consequences. We look forward to a morebalanced and nuanced treatment of this subject by your magazine and greater accountabilityon the part of your editors. Considering the vast influence that Time magazine has amongsuch a wide spectrum of the public, we ask that you consider running a series of stories inyour magazine to counter the damage done by this article.

Yours sincerely,

Claire SmithPresident

The World Archaeological Congress is a non-profit organization: WAC 501(c)(3) 52-2294579 074000010 697011369